To be honest, as little as five years ago, I might have assumed this video was a big load of BS. I am aware that it was made by a firm whose goal is to 'make things that go viral' rather than 'actually prove anything.' So with such a goal, labeling completely innocent greetings as 'harassment' for a youtube video is sure to reap in the rage clicks (I'm not saying some of those hellos didn't have an eventual endgame in mind, but that's the truth of any interaction between people, whether or not that endgame is 'sex/relationship'). The radfem sites will run it because it fits perfectly with their agenda, the manosphere will instantly snap it up and return fire because it's so ridiculous, and then every place that doesn't really care about the gender argument either way, but definitely likes adsense money and click revenue will pick it up because it's now 'controversial' (the media's favorite word). Reality need not enter the equation.

But I have seen this in action, even been a part of it myself. A year and some such ago I said hello to a girl at work and tried to strike up a conversation (I had no designs on her whatsoever, but I like to talk to people, because why the f**k not). She smiles/grimaces and looks away, doesn't really engage, and an hour later, I get called into the office and told there has been a sexual harassment complaint made against me.

I don't know if this kind of behavior is truly so borderline autistic and antisocial that it's actually honestly perceived as threatening, or if the whole pomp and circumstance of 'harassment' is largely an ego thing; the idea of harassment carries the underlying implication of rejection (e.g. an advance of some sort was unwanted, and you can keep whatever you're selling). And who gets to reject people? Why, people who are IMPORTANT, of course.

Signet wrote:I don't know if this kind of behavior is truly so borderline autistic and antisocial that it's actually honestly perceived as threatening, or if the whole pomp and circumstance of 'harassment' is largely an ego thing; the idea of harassment carries the underlying implication of rejection (e.g. an advance of some sort was unwanted, and you can keep whatever you're selling). And who gets to reject people? Why, people who are IMPORTANT, of course.

To be fair, it is possible that with all the PUA douchebaggery being promoted to the point where dickheads are constantly trying to game females into sex, females could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that any contact from men is a cynical attempt to f**k them.

Signet wrote:I don't know if this kind of behavior is truly so borderline autistic and antisocial that it's actually honestly perceived as threatening, or if the whole pomp and circumstance of 'harassment' is largely an ego thing; the idea of harassment carries the underlying implication of rejection (e.g. an advance of some sort was unwanted, and you can keep whatever you're selling). And who gets to reject people? Why, people who are IMPORTANT, of course.

To be fair, it is possible that with all the PUA douchebaggery being promoted to the point where dickheads are constantly trying to game females into sex, females could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that any contact from men is a cynical attempt to f**k them.

Cornfed wrote:To be fair, it is possible that with all the PUA douchebaggery being promoted to the point where dickheads are constantly trying to game females into sex, females could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that any contact from men is a cynical attempt to f**k them.

This is absolutely true, and it's something that kind of sucks about the popularization of PUA behavior, but it still leads to comically exaggerated reactions that don't really do anything to fix the problem. If your house suddenly started getting broken into repeatedly, you might take extra precautions to protect your property (buy a weapon, buy better locks/latches, make sure you lock your doors more, etc.), but does it help to start shooting people for passing in front of your house? It's a solution with a lot of finality and not necessarily a high accuracy rate of hitting the people you want it to.

I do understand at least the beginnings of the thought process that leads to that kind of thing, but not the trigger happiness that results, which eventually compounds on itself, and ultimately doesn't solve the issue. The people most likely to actually BE harassing you, are the ones least likely to be controlled by your disincentives.

Hahah great video, he nails it.
What's ironic is that the poor ameri-chump thinks that hideous bitch is a "hot girl" LMAO.

A long time ago i lived in San-Diego (Californiasylum) and mumbled "hello" to this scowling c**t in my college library. She came back and said "what did you just say to me" in an aggressive voice, I was so blue-pilled at the time, i was stumped. Today it would be a different story...

1)Too much of one thing defeats the purpose.
2)Everybody is full of it. What's your hypocrisy?